Publication in BibTeX Format

@TECHREPORT{AICPub1470:1970,
AUTHOR={Kling, Robert E.},
TITLE={Design Implications of Theorem-Proving Strategies},
ADDRESS={333 Ravenswood Ave, Menlo Park, CA 94025},
INSTITUTION={AI Center, SRI International},
MONTH={Oct},
NUMBER={44},
YEAR={1970},
KEYWORDS={Theorem Proving, QA3.6, QA3.5},
ABSTRACT={QA3.6 is a new resolution theorem prover that allows a user to flexibly
elect subsets of pre-set strategies and to easily state strategies of is own.
Presumably, some strategies will in fact be expressionable within hours after
conception, while others may require days or weeks and require modifying the
system. Currently, when a user wishes to add new strategy to the old QA3.5
he must modify certain system functions. Frequently several functions must
be modified and the flow of information rerouted nontrivially. Furthermore,
a QA3.5 user must be intimately familiar with the various internal representations
and system structure in order to write a successful strategy. We hope to design
QA3.6 so that a strategy writer need not know much, if anything about the internal
representations and information flows. He will be able to work in a language
which is closer to the vernacular of resolution logic, e.g., clauses, literals,
resolvents, etc, than to the language of implementation, e.g., caar, cadar,
etc. In order to facilitate this goal, it is likely that the best design of
QA3.6 would create a series of check past which all information of certain
kinds would flow. Thus, to add a particular (selection or delection) strategy
would require modifying only one well understood section of QA3.6 rather than
several clever, but idiosyncratically-chosen spots. Presumably, such well-defined
changes could be automated for most users. },
NOTE={SRI Project 8776. The research reported herein was sponsored by National
Science Foundation Grant GJ-1060.}
}